4.8 Article

Pivotal role of cerebral interleukin-17-producing γδT cells in the delayed phase of ischemic brain injury

期刊

NATURE MEDICINE
卷 15, 期 8, 页码 946-U150

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nm.1999

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan
  2. Program for Promotion of Fundamental Studies in Health Sciences of the National Institute of Biomedical Innovation [NIBIO, 07-4]
  3. Naito Foundation
  4. Astellas Foundation for Research on Metabolic Disorders.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lymphocyte recruitment and activation have been implicated in the progression of cerebral ischemia-reperfusion (I/R) injury, but the roles of specific lymphocyte subpopulations and cytokines during stroke remain to be clarified. Here we demonstrate that the infiltration of T cells into the brain, as well as the cytokines interleukin-23 (IL-23) and IL-17, have pivotal roles in the evolution of brain infarction and accompanying neurological deficits. Blockade of T cell infiltration into the brain by the immunosuppressant FTY720 reduced I/R-induced brain damage. The expression of IL-23, which was derived mostly from infiltrated macrophages, increased on day 1 after I/R, whereas IL-17 levels were elevated after day 3, and this induction of IL-17 was dependent on IL-23. These data, together with analysis of mice genetically disrupted for IL-17 and IL-23, suggest that IL-23 functions in the immediate stage of I/R brain injury, whereas IL-17 has an important role in the delayed phase of I/R injury during which apoptotic neuronal death occurs in the penumbra. Intracellular cytokine staining revealed that gamma delta T lymphocytes, but not CD4(+) helper T cells, were a major source of IL-17. Moreover, depletion of gamma delta T lymphocytes ameliorated the I/R injury. We propose that T lymphocytes, including gamma delta T lymphocytes, could be a therapeutic target for mitigating the inflammatory events that amplify the initial damage in cerebral ischemia.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据